The results from the ACCORD study were recently published in New England Journal of Medicine. Even to those of us used to the excesses of medical science, this is quite remarkable. The conclusions, as stated in the abstract, are
"As compared with standard therapy, the use of intensive therapy to target normal glycated hemoglobin levels for 3.5 years increased mortality and did not significantly reduce major cardiovascular events. These findings identify a previously unrecognized harm of intensive glucose lowering in high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes."

The intensive therapy is not described (certainly unlikely to include carbohydrate restriction) and, in fact, includes numerous different drugs in different combinations. Rather than identifying which of the treatments might cause the increased mortality, authors jump to the conclusion that lowering HbA1c is the culprit. This lack of scientific reasoning would not be accepted from an undergraduate student.

Scientists are stymied. Fighting with the NIH is, of course, generally not a career builder, and in any case, the number of people involved in the trial numbers in the hundreds and who will stand up alone to the writing committee? Only the public can help.

"Considering the toxic nature of blood glucose in any quantity above normal, it's nonsensical to conclude that lowering blood glucose to normal blood level, even aggressively through drug therapy or otherwise, is the cause of death of those unfortunate that died during the ACCORD trial.

Lowering blood glucose to normal level through diet alone i.e. low carbohydrates produces no harmful effect that we can see. On the contrary, the lowering of blood glucose to normal level through diet alone brings about a slew of beneficial effects that result from this lower, normal blood glucose. Effects such as reversal of many related diseases such as obesity, diabetes type 2 and atherosclerosis.

Accordingly, if the subjects of the ACCORD trial did die of causes related to the trial's methods, then it's clearly not because their blood glucose was lowered to normal level. Instead, the only possible alternative is to consider that the method of lowering their blood glucose level is the cause of death: Intensive and as-of-yet never before tried drug therapy."

The use of a low carbohydrate diet was a moderately successful treatment for type 1 diabetes before the discovery of injected insulin. The main control of blood glucose was removal of the source, which by and large are carbohydrates.

Later, more drugs are used to control blood glucose in diets heavy in carbohydrates - which metabolize mainly to blood glucose.

It is like the "modern" way of fighting fires. 1) avoid the use of old fashioned fireproof materials, 2) use bigger water pumps, hydrants and hoses to put out the flames of combustion instead.

Well, I'm half asleep after a long day in the garden, but here is what I wrote:

"Blaming the lowering of blood sugar with increased mortality without even mentioning the "other" interventions is infantile, irresponsible, and an egregious misappropriation of the public trust that is in direct contratiction to the actual science. Please, wake up, read the mountains of research done in the past 100 years, and see the real picture. Type II Diabetes, CVD, and Hypertension is caused by the excessive consumption of processed, refined carbohydrate."

I guess I could have been a little more diplomatic, and certainly more factual, but hey, it's late, and I'm covered in dirt and slime.

I am surprised that we have only 140 signers of the petition. If nothing else, the ACCORD study was done with tax-payer dollars and the NEJM article has the statement "This study was not designed to test the components of the intervention strategy." I know it is hard to say that a large collection of medical researchers are simply not thinking like scientists but there it is. How could they do a study without testing the key independent variables? Perhaps these very limitations will allow us to make head-way on the general unwillingness to face carbohydrate restriction. In any case, if you believe in this, please sign the petition and encourage those of your friends who believe in it to do so also.http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/ge...xperts-who-have
RF